C
Cosmodot
Guest
...way to dodge the question?
"Does saying "There is no God," actually provide an answer or is it just a convenient way to dodge the question?"
I would say that it dodges the question of "What is God?" but that's really the only question I can think of to which such an answer would even be relevant.
If I ask a Creationist to explain why Humans and Apes have many identical "errors" in identical locations in the DNA corresponding to the signature of an identical strain of endogenous retrovirus integration (In other words, Human and Chimp DNA have both exhibited many of the exact same mutations at some point in the past.) the answer would likely be, "Because that's the way God wanted it." or more classically "To test our faith."
In real science, these findings form the basis of common descent.
In "creation science," such damning discoveries are completely ignored in order to maintain their unverified preconceptions.
For something to be science, it must adhere to ALL facts while remaining falsifiable.
That something is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, that IF it is false, then this can be shown by observation or experiment. Falsifiability is an important concept in science and the philosophy of science. The term "Testability" is related but more specific; it means that an assertion can be falsified through experimentation alone.
To claim that ID is a science is to reveal your ignorance of science. It is, at best, a supernatural philosophy. At worst, it's a politically motivated movement to control knowledge by obscuring or censoring scientific facts and principles in order to maintain religion's long-held monopoly on apparent truth... They likely tell themselves that they're doing God's work when in reality they're really only trying to define HOW God works. Apparently, by ID standards, He works fast by just "speaking" things into existence within an instant, regardless of how much evidence is found to the contrary and believe it or not, there's plenty.
"What other evidence is there of this theory?"
The implications set forth by the genetic evidence is enough, practically, to assume that the genome of the chimp and human were at one time merged. The probability that just ONE of these errors (or mutations) could occur independently in both species is incomprehensible, yet there are SEVERAL of them to be found.
Common descent is even further supported by the theory of chromosomal fusion, which was predicted from the fact that our great ape ancestors had 48 chromosomes (or 24 pairs) while we only have 46 (23 pairs). It was predicted that (if evolution was correct) that we should be able to find this "bonding site" within a human chromosome that would resemble the ends of two ape chromosomes. This was indeed found. The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2.
Oh and there's more... Much more. [Cont.]
"Does saying "There is no God," actually provide an answer or is it just a convenient way to dodge the question?"
I would say that it dodges the question of "What is God?" but that's really the only question I can think of to which such an answer would even be relevant.
If I ask a Creationist to explain why Humans and Apes have many identical "errors" in identical locations in the DNA corresponding to the signature of an identical strain of endogenous retrovirus integration (In other words, Human and Chimp DNA have both exhibited many of the exact same mutations at some point in the past.) the answer would likely be, "Because that's the way God wanted it." or more classically "To test our faith."
In real science, these findings form the basis of common descent.
In "creation science," such damning discoveries are completely ignored in order to maintain their unverified preconceptions.
For something to be science, it must adhere to ALL facts while remaining falsifiable.
That something is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, that IF it is false, then this can be shown by observation or experiment. Falsifiability is an important concept in science and the philosophy of science. The term "Testability" is related but more specific; it means that an assertion can be falsified through experimentation alone.
To claim that ID is a science is to reveal your ignorance of science. It is, at best, a supernatural philosophy. At worst, it's a politically motivated movement to control knowledge by obscuring or censoring scientific facts and principles in order to maintain religion's long-held monopoly on apparent truth... They likely tell themselves that they're doing God's work when in reality they're really only trying to define HOW God works. Apparently, by ID standards, He works fast by just "speaking" things into existence within an instant, regardless of how much evidence is found to the contrary and believe it or not, there's plenty.
"What other evidence is there of this theory?"
The implications set forth by the genetic evidence is enough, practically, to assume that the genome of the chimp and human were at one time merged. The probability that just ONE of these errors (or mutations) could occur independently in both species is incomprehensible, yet there are SEVERAL of them to be found.
Common descent is even further supported by the theory of chromosomal fusion, which was predicted from the fact that our great ape ancestors had 48 chromosomes (or 24 pairs) while we only have 46 (23 pairs). It was predicted that (if evolution was correct) that we should be able to find this "bonding site" within a human chromosome that would resemble the ends of two ape chromosomes. This was indeed found. The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2.
Oh and there's more... Much more. [Cont.]